Children, Same Sex [Civil] Marriage, and Families

[ThinkingSapien]

Recently in another thread about secular arguments against gay marriage the view was repeatedly stated that civil marriage exists to protect children (I have disagreements with some aspects of this but will grant the statement for now). While that thread was active Sesame Studios released a video about family ( youtu.be/FtoA4Q2uOXw ) that featured families composed several different combinations of adults. In addition to the prototypical family there were families of same sex couples displayed.

This raised a question for me. Whether a child is a biological descendant of her parents or jointly adopted doesn’t seem to make any significant difference that I’ve found in the laws concerning care for the child. If civil marriage is about protecting children and if there already exists gay couples that adopt children then would same sex civil marriage be considered in general to be more advantageous than disadvantageous to children adopted by such couples? It allows both people to be the child’s guardian and thus have legal obligations to the child instead of one.

 

[inocente]

My understanding is here in Spain it used to be that homosexuals could adopt, but only one person in the couple could be named as the legal guardian, which meant that if that person subsequently died then neither the child nor remaining adoptive parent had any automatic legal right to continue as a family.

The introduction of equal marriage 2005 enabled joint adoption in both names.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

My understanding is here in Spain …

My understanding for here in the USA is pretty much the same; shared legal guardianship required marriage. If the unmarried guardian died family members had higher priority in consideration of who could take the child next.

 

[1neophyte]

If civil marriage is about protecting children and if there already exists gay couples that adopt children then would same sex civil marriage be considered in general to be more advantageous than disadvantageous to children adopted by such couples? It allows both people to be the child’s guardian and thus have legal obligations to the child instead of one.

No.

Despite the foolish assertion that gender is just some meaningless attribute like hair color or fashion sense, and can be changed like one’s preferred style of shoes, it is disadvantageous to a child to not have the influence of both a man and a woman in a parental role. Anything else is an unfortunate compromise that is not in the best interest of the child. To make an unfortunate compromise into a idealized norm is nothing less than madness.

But madness is currently quite fashionable.

 

[MaryT777]

No.

Despite the foolish assertion that gender is just some meaningless attribute like hair color or fashion sense, and can be changed like one’s preferred style of shoes, it is disadvantageous to a child to not have the influence of both a man and a woman in a parental role. Anything else is an unfortunate compromise that is not in the best interest of the child. To make an unfortunate compromise into a idealized norm is nothing less than madness.

But madness is currently quite fashionable.

Well said, and Amen!!!

Mary.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Despite the foolish assertion that gender is just some meaningless attribute like hair color or fashion sense

I think you are talking about trans-gender. That’s different then sexuality. Someone can be transgender and still exclusively have interest in the opposite sex.

it is disadvantageous to a child to not have the influence of both a man and a woman in a parental role. Anything else is an unfortunate compromise that is not in the best interest of the child.

Why is it not in the best interest?

Would not adoption by a gay couple not be better than living in a foster or group home?

How would you rank adoption by a gay couple vs adoption by a single man or woman?

 

[1neophyte]

I think you are talking about trans-gender. That’s different then sexuality. Someone can be transgender and still exclusively have interest in the opposite sex.

Why is it not in the best interest?

Would not adoption by a gay couple not be better than living in a foster or group home?

How would you rank adoption by a gay couple vs adoption by a single man or woman?

I wasn’t talking about transgender, I was talking about the value that a woman brings to the raising of a child, and the value that a man brings to the raising of a child. Neither are replaceable. It has nothing to do with economics or legal obligations. Adoption by a single man or woman is not ideal, because the child would be missing the benefits of having either a mother or a father, but it is sometimes necessary. An adoption by a gay couple is missing that same piece, but is even less ideal because it instills a deception in the child in place of a truth, namely that the difference between how a child relates to a mother and how he/she relates to a father are completely interchangeable.

The fundamental disagreement isn’t about the rightness or wrongness of sexual orientation. It’s about whether a family functions best when it is lived out as designed by God, or if it is no different than abstract modern art, where you can just slop a bunch of colors and shapes on a canvas with no rhyme or reason and call it a masterpiece. God certainly provides grace to every human being regardless of their sin, but that doesn’t mean a society should equate all behaviors and choices as equal.

If someone is unable to walk, wheelchairs exist. That doesn’t mean we should all strive to use wheelchairs instead of walking. Just because God can bless an unfortunate situation with his grace doesn’t mean we should just give up and say human beings can be raised however and by whoever and it’s all the same. There is an objective truth about what is best for a child to thrive, and it isn’t just a vague proclamation of “love”.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I wasn’t talking about transgender, I was talking about the value that a woman brings to the raising of a child, and the value that a man brings to the raising of a child. Neither are replaceable.

What are the differences in the effects of having a mixed sex couple raising a child and a same sex couple?

An adoption by a gay couple is missing that same piece, but is even less ideal because it instills a deception in the child in place of a truth, namely that the difference between how a child relates to a mother and how he/she relates to a father are completely interchangeable.

A friend mine sitting here reading this with me and I don’t quite understand what might be meant by “how a child relates…”. What is meant by that and why is it important that a child relates in a certain way?

The fundamental disagreement isn’t about the rightness or wrongness of sexual orientation. It’s about whether a family functions best when it is lived out as designed by God,

I understand some of the religious objections against it. Wondering if the foundations of the objections are only religious.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

What are the differences in the effects of having a mixed sex couple raising a child and a same sex couple?

A friend mine sitting here reading this with me and I don’t quite understand what might be meant by “how a child relates…”. What is meant by that and why is it important that a child relates in a certain way?

I understand some of the religious objections against it. Wondering if the foundations of the objections are only religious.

If you are asking these obvious questions, like how a female mother is different from a male father, there is really nothing anyone can help you with here. Did you have a female mother and a male father?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

If you are asking these obvious questions, like how a female mother is different from a male father, there is really nothing anyone can help you with here.

I’m not sure that there is uniformity in the role(s) that father plays in a child’s life or uniformity that a mother plays in a child’s life (at least once the birth and breast feeding are over). I wouldn’t infer from my experience with my parents too much about how other parents raise their own or that the methods my parents used are a must and used by other parents. I don’t want do draw too many conclusions from a sample set of one.

But even if it is obvious to you would you mind sharing?

Thanks.

 

[1neophyte]

I understand some of the religious objections against it. Wondering if the foundations of the objections are only religious.

You’re asking questions that can’t be answered in a few lines on a message board. But there’s really no need to bring religion into it. If I were to say that God designed human beings to depend on 6-9 hours of sleep every 24 hour period, that is not a “religious” assertion. It’s a simple and observable fact. If someone said they’ve decided they’re going to live off of 45 minutes of sleep every night, it would not be a “religious” objection to say that it is unhealthy to do so. I am absolutely dumbfounded when people think that “religion” is just some sort of arbitrary tradition with meaningless rules. Saying that children are best served when they are raised by a mother and father is not just some “religious” or traditional notion. It’s a simple and observable fact.

Before you even get into the question of how children relate to mothers and fathers differently, you have to begin with a foundation of understanding what makes a “happy” or emotional healthy human being. Based on what you’ve said so far, I don’t think we have a common understanding of what a “successful” child-rearing looks like, so there’s probably not much of a point in discussing why the most direct road to “success” begins with a child being raised by a man and a woman.

 

[Bradski]

No.

Despite the foolish assertion that gender is just some meaningless attribute like hair color or fashion sense, and can be changed like one’s preferred style of shoes…

I think that you just made that up. No-one has ever made that assertion. It’s a nonsensical thing to say. But of course, you can always quote someone who has said it.

 

[1neophyte]

I think that you just made that up. No-one has ever made that assertion. It’s a nonsensical thing to say. But of course, you can always quote someone who has said it.

No one has ever made the assertion that gender is interchangeable? Really? Every post-op transgender person has asserted it with their actions. How can I “quote” that? The very premise of this discussion is the assertion that there is no difference between “mother” and “father” based on gender. I agree that it is nonsensical, but at any given moment, somebody somewhere is asserting it.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

If I were to say that God designed human beings to depend on 6-9 hours of sleep every 24 hour period, that is not a “religious” assertion.

The “God designed human beings” part would make it religious. If the part about God were omitted then it would not be. If asked why this amount of sleep is needed then there may be consequences that those that consistently get less sleep than this might display that a person being given this information may care about. It might convince someone to abide by a rule on getting enough sleep.

I’ve never come across a clearly defined set of consequences for being raised by a homosexual couple.

It’s a simple and observable fact. If someone said they’ve decided they’re going to live off of 45 minutes of sleep every night, it would not be a “religious” objection to say that it is unhealthy to do so.

Quite right. If I were to ask what is unhealthy about it you might be able to name some consequences.

Saying that children are best served when they are raised by a mother and father is not just some “religious” or traditional notion. It’s a simple and observable fact.

What are the observations that support the statement?

Based on what you’ve said so far, I don’t think we have a common understanding of what a “successful” child-rearing looks like, so there’s probably not much of a point in discussing why the most direct road to “success” begins with a child being raised by a man and a woman.

Even if the methods of child rearing were to stay undefined a difference in outcome might be enough to show that a child raised by a single mother is better off than a child raised by two women married together. You’ve mentioned something that comes across as vague to me about how well the child “relates” and about an unnamed undefined “deception.”

 

[Bradski]

No one has ever made the assertion that gender is interchangeable? Really?

That’s not what you said. You specifically said:

‘Despite the foolish assertion that gender is just some meaningless attribute like hair color or fashion sense…’

You are comparing an exceptionally difficult and traumatic decision that some people need to make with changing their hair colour.

That’s trite, nonsensical, thoughtless and demeaning to those who have to make that decision.

Now would you like to stand by that comment or qualify it in some way?

 

[1neophyte]

That’s not what you said. You specifically said:

‘Despite the foolish assertion that gender is just some meaningless attribute like hair color or fashion sense…’

You are comparing an exceptionally difficult and traumatic decision that some people need to make with changing their hair colour.

That’s trite, nonsensical, thoughtless and demeaning to those who have to make that decision.

Now would you like to stand by that comment or qualify it in some way?

I shouldn’t have used the word “meaningless”. The reason the decision is difficult and traumatic is because the people that make it are quite literally at war with themselves. Making the observation that gender is not changeable like hair color is not demeaning. What is actually demeaning is supporting such a decision.

 

[1neophyte]

The “God designed human beings” part would make it religious. If the part about God were omitted then it would not be. If asked why this amount of sleep is needed then there may be consequences that those that consistently get less sleep than this might display that a person being given this information may care about. It might convince someone to abide by a rule on getting enough sleep.

I’ve never come across a clearly defined set of consequences for being raised by a homosexual couple.

Quite right. If I were to ask what is unhealthy about it you might be able to name some consequences.

What are the observations that support the statement?

Even if the methods of child rearing were to stay undefined a difference in outcome might be enough to show that a child raised by a single mother is better off than a child raised by two women married together. You’ve mentioned something that comes across as vague to me about how well the child “relates” and about an unnamed undefined “deception.”

All of these issues are too complex to give a simple, quantifiable answer. You used the phrase “better off,” but before we can decide whether a child is better off, we have to agree on what “better off” means before even starting the conversation. I don’t think we can agree on that definition.

I was raised by a single mother, and I could tell you about the concrete consequences I faced and face because of not having a father in my life, but you would probably respond with, “well, your situation is unique to you, and doesn’t apply to all of humanity.” Nevertheless, I can promise you that I didn’t miss out on anything by not having a second mother.

There’s really no way to sufficiently articulate my position in this limited context. The only thing I can point to is the Amazon TV series “Transparent.” It is an extraordinary work with both incredible writing and acting, and perfectly displays the brokenness that results when gender roles are not clearly defined in regard to parent/children relationships. Someone else might watch the series and think that it is about a family filled with courageous heroes living a beautiful life, but all I see is a tragically sad group of broken people who wallow in their wounds rather than seek healing. That is where the real disagreement lies; not on whether a given situation is “better” than another, but on what the actual definition of “better” is.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

I’m not sure that there is uniformity in the role(s) that father plays in a child’s life or uniformity that a mother plays in a child’s life (at least once the birth and breast feeding are over). I wouldn’t infer from my experience with my parents too much about how other parents raise their own or that the methods my parents used are a must and used by other parents. I don’t want do draw too many conclusions from a sample set of one.

But even if it is obvious to you would you mind sharing?

Thanks.

For example, a daughter can identify with her mother in the way she grows up physically with breasts and other female parts, menstruation, etc., likewise a son can identify with his father physically as he grows up. It’s not rocket science: it’s been going on for ages and ages.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

For example, a daughter can identify with her mother in the way she grows up physically with breasts and other female parts, menstruation, etc., likewise a son can identify with his father physically as he grows up. It’s not rocket science: it’s been going on for ages and ages.

Okay, so you are referring to having a guide for puberty and sexual ddevelopment. So this is a non-issue issue if a same sex couple has a child of the same sex.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Okay, so you are referring to having a guide for puberty and sexual ddevelopment. So this is a non-issue issue if a same sex couple has a child of the same sex.

What about the other way around? That happens constantly.

Aside from that, a boy with a female mother learns how to relate to other females, and vice versa. This stuff is so basic that I don’t even know why we are talking about it.